Toronto's sell-off competition

If Toronto were to decide the upside to the current team was limited and were to get active on the trade market, what other teams would they be competing with to return maximum assets? In other words, what teams are going to be sellers and what are they selling?

Granger is the only high-profile wing on that list, so I view him as the primary direct competition to either Gay or DeRozan, should the Raps decide to shop one/both of them. Granger is an injury risk on an expiring contract ($14M), Gay is the best overall talent today and DeRozan is the youngest/cheapest/controlled longest/most upside. I guess it depends what aspect(s) the other team values most, partly due to how their potential offer matches up with the expected return for each of them.

On a related note, how good would Aldridge look in a lineup alongside Valanciunas and Gay? That would be more of a retooling move to improve in the short-term (opposite of the tanking/rebuilding premise of this thread, I know).

The problem is that the Pacers essentially can't afford to take any long term salary. If they trade Granger, it's for expirings+picks. Would they do that? They are contenders. It would significantly hurt them this year, in return for a pick which may not even pan out for many years.

Very interesting question, but way too much complexity for my mind to try and wrap around at the moment. Man, you need to look at 28 teams, their needs, their assets. Ouch. my head is already hurting, but it could lead to interesting discussion,,,,,,,, as long as this thread doesn't get into another tank/no-tank battle, or DeMar skill-set battle.

Granger is the only high-profile wing on that list, so I view him as the primary direct competition to either Gay or DeRozan, should the Raps decide to shop one/both of them. Granger is an injury risk on an expiring contract ($14M), Gay is the best overall talent today and DeRozan is the youngest/cheapest/controlled longest/most upside. I guess it depends what aspect(s) the other team values most, partly due to how their potential offer matches up with the expected return for each of them.

On a related note, how good would Aldridge look in a lineup alongside Valanciunas and Gay? That would be more of a retooling move to improve in the short-term (opposite of the tanking/rebuilding premise of this thread, I know).

Aldridge would be an awesome fit in the lineup, there's no doubt. The obvious problem is how you land him.

Wasn't there a rumour that the Cavs were offering the #1, Thompson and Waiters for him and got denied before the draft? It's pretty hard to fathom the Raps putting together a better offer than that without making JV available.

The problem is that the Pacers essentially can't afford to take any long term salary. If they trade Granger, it's for expirings+picks. Would they do that? They are contenders. It would significantly hurt them this year, in return for a pick which may not even pan out for many years.

I don't know that I see them as major competition (for selling Gay).

The bolded was my first thought, until I remembered that they played the end of the season and playoffs without him, managing to do pretty well. Given his age, degree of injury risk, declining production and contract status, as well as the team's financial situation ($70M in salary, with both George and Stephenson expiring after this coming season), I could easily see them looking to get younger/cheaper at the SF spot.

With Aldridge, it's a different scenario. The team has no interest in getting rid of him. He's their core piece, and he fits what they're trying to do in Portland. He's only on this list because of a rumour that HE wanted to leave them, not the reverse. And that may change if the moves they've made this summer work out for them.

So if you want Aldridge, you're a) going to have to be an attractive destination for him, and b) going to have to pay a premium to Portland, who are not motivated to let him go.

Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

With Aldridge, it's a different scenario. The team has no interest in getting rid of him. He's their core piece, and he fits what they're trying to do in Portland. He's only on this list because of a rumour that HE wanted to leave them, not the reverse. And that may change if the moves they've made this summer work out for them.

So if you want Aldridge, you're a) going to have to be an attractive destination for him, and b) going to have to pay a premium to Portland, who are not motivated to let him go.

Right but Aldridge is also a free agent in 2015, so if he wants to go Portland may be forced into a situation where they have to trade him THIS season. If they wait till 14-15, they might have trouble getting as much back for a one-year or half-year rental of Aldridge. It's kind of like the Deron Williams situation with the Jazz in that sense. I think the Nets were willing to trade that many assets because they knew they'd have time to try and woo DWill into staying.

The bolded was my first thought, until I remembered that they played the end of the season and playoffs without him, managing to do pretty well. Given his age, degree of injury risk, declining production and contract status, as well as the team's financial situation ($70M in salary, with both George and Stephenson expiring after this coming season), I could easily see them looking to get younger/cheaper at the SF spot.

But it's very similar to the Thunder situation last year. Knowing that you were that close to winning it all do you risk it with a player that will help (even if not immensely, his ability to score would be a boost against the Heat, Bulls and anyone from the West they might meet in the finals) but cost money and will probably leave for nothing, or do you get what you can and hope you can have your cake and eat it too?

I think if Granger and George play well together at the start of the year you'll see Indiana keep him and go for it because they don't want to go out the same way the Thunder, and to a lesser extent the Grizzlies went out last year, with people putting some of the blame on the GM/owners for making those moves.

If Toronto were to decide the upside to the current team was limited and were to get active on the trade market, what other teams would they be competing with to return maximum assets? In other words, what teams are going to be sellers and what are they selling?

Aldridge would be an awesome fit in the lineup, there's no doubt. The obvious problem is how you land him.

Wasn't there a rumour that the Cavs were offering the #1, Thompson and Waiters for him and got denied before the draft? It's pretty hard to fathom the Raps putting together a better offer than that without making JV available.

Aldridge would be an awesome fit in the lineup, there's no doubt. The obvious problem is how you land him.

Wasn't there a rumour that the Cavs were offering the #1, Thompson and Waiters for him and got denied before the draft? It's pretty hard to fathom the Raps putting together a better offer than that without making JV available.

What are the Cleveland Cavaliers seeking in exchange for the No. 1 pick? Sources say they reached out to the Portland Trail Blazers in an attempt to land LaMarcus Aldridge for the Nos. 1 and 19 picks. The Blazers quickly rebuffed them.

Oh and get this at the bottom there's a link to another page where it says they offered Waiters+1st+TT for Love.

The inverse of this thread is what position is the 'weakest' across the league which requires an upgrade.

I see very few teams that must upgrade the SG position, at least where DD is the guard being considered the upgrade. I can see Pistons for certain and maybe Suns/Bulls/Hawks.

On the other hand, there are many team that teams can upgrade their SF. They start with Detroit, New Orleans, Milwaukee and Houston as the most likely, while Dallas, Charlotte, Cleveland, Sacramento, Phoenix and Washington are less likely to upgrade the starting SF and maybe even Atlanta, Minnesota.

On PG, the Bucks (Knight) should upgrade though after that candidates for Lowry are less probable with maybe SAC (Vasquez), Bobcats (Walker), Dallas (upgrade defense). Also, the Heat, Detroit or Knicks who might upgrade.

For PF, I don't see a big market there to upgrade but perhaps Dallas, Charlotte, Clippers (bruiser) or Pelicans (bruiser).

I didn't look at C as the raptors don't have a starting center they are willing to trade.

Why are you so rude to people? Does it make you feel smarter/cooler to be rude rather than just say that the link doesn't support his comment? Perhaps it was the incorrect link, or maybe he simply made a mistake. Being rude about it doesn't make him look like the imbecile...